The Harm of Asbestos, The Killer Dust - Essay Example

ASBESTOS Major victims of asbestos had been workers in general industries, transport, building and shipyards. It was an awful discovery that transformed this magic mineral into a killer dust. Has been used extensively as building material, especially from 1950s to 1980s1. It is extremely toxic and according to later medical evidence, this fibrous mineral causes extreme health problems like asbestosis and mesotheleoma. 3,500 people are estimated to be dying in UK every year due to Asbestos exposure. 25% of them are working in building industry or transport, or near asbestos sites. An estimated 1.3 million employees in the construction and general industry are at risk. No doubt, we are exposed to a certain level of asbestos material all the time. Asbestos, in the finished form, does not pose any health hazard. Remodelling, repair, maintenance, demolition, sale and transport combined with rough handling all can release these deadly fibres into water or air2. Inhalation of these fibres for a continuous period could be extremely dangerous. . Chrysotile, a fibrous mineral which neither burns nor rots, flexible with maximum tensile strength, extremely useful, lightweight, can create a formidable surface mixed with cementing materials, could be used as high temperature seals and gaskets, known over 2000 years, first mined in Russia, Italy and Canada. Old products, unlike today's improved technological ones, crumbled easily under pressure and released more harmful fibres. All these fibres are non-inflammable Asbestos is a highly emotive topic with two shrill schools of thought, one saying that asbestos should be banned; another arguing that asbestos of today would not be a killer. European Union (EU)3 and the United Kingdom (UK)4 both argue that asbestos is carcinogenic and targets multiple organs of the dust inhaler. According to their rules all types of asbestos are harmful and there is no safe level of exposure and the weight of evidence to support this is incontrovertible and historical. It is impossible to control the exposure to asbestos in workplace and hence, alternative products must be used. Asbestos should be discarded as a harmful object and should be banned, to protect public health. This risk-based approach depends on the fact that there is no identified lower exposure limit to which workers can be safely exposed.5 In spite of the overwhelming medical reports, there is little scientific research evidence to back this viewpoint and the entire exercise seems to be more of a public emotional grandstand. Asbestos is heat resistant and is used in a wide variety of industrial and domestic appliances and this makes it particularly difficult to avoid it completely. It is a mineral fibre used in a variety of building construction materials for insulation and it is also a fire-retardant. The necessity of completely stopping the usage too is questioned by many scientists. The Canadian Chrysotile Institute has the opposite philosophy. They insist that the body of evidence about Chrysotile asbestos and its related diseases is more ambiguous and complex. They believe that there are significant differences in the risk posed due to the fibre type and the nature of the exposure to different types of asbestos. The high risks that were identified in cohort studies of the past are no longer relevant under current exposure conditions. They argue that asbestos can be used safely under carefully controlled conditions. They challenge the claim that alternatives that are used to substitute asbestos are not carcinogenic and reiterate that Chrysotile is safe. Then again, there is precious little scientific evidence to prove their claim. In 1986, International Labour Organisation (ILO) organised the convention concerning safety regarding Asbestos' use6 and the participating 143 countries unanimously approved7 C162 Asbestos Convention 162, 1986.8 This Convention prohibits the use of crocidolite9 and sprayed-on asbestos.10 But Canadian Chrysotile Institute claims that the ILO 'advocates the strict regulation of Chrysotile, but does not provide any prohibitions.'11 The ILO Convention 162 document does not prohibit the use of Chrysotile, but it does not endorse its use either. Instead it encourages a controlled-use approach.12 Documents outline the regulatory measures that should be implemented by employers for safe use of Chrysotile. Regulatory compliance should be enforced by regular inspections made by a government agency.13 This authority should consult with representative organisations to ensure that information about the risks working with Chrysotile is properly disseminated14. Dr. M. Camus is of the opinion that Chrysotile Institute's approach is 'oversimplification and avoidance of evidence'15 He also points out that 'the statements on controlled use and substitutes are supported neither by evidence nor by references.'16 Children could be exposed to cancer due to the work of a parent in asbestos connected work site and women who washed the clothes of their men folk similarly employed faced the same risk17. EPA and CPSC have banned different forms of asbestos products. Manufacturing has been discouraged and today it is found only in older homes, pipes, furnace insulation materials, millboard, textured paints, asbestos shingles, ceiling tiles and sheets, coating materials and sometimes floor tiles. Cutting, sanding or any other kind of reshaping activities, transporting, loading and unloading can leash out concentrated airborne asbestos and asbestos-containing materials. Rough and ignorant handling of the material can release asbestos fibres into the building air and under such circumstances people in the building could be at risk of contacting any of the health complications. There will not be any immediate symptoms; but chest and abdominal cancers (mesothelioma) and other lung diseases could be originated. It is also proved that smokers are at a bigger risk of lung cancer due to asbestos material. The really dangerous fibres are invisible and once they enter the lungs they stay there and get accumulated. They can even get fatal lung scarring called asbestosis. The most dangerous part of it is that the symptoms lay dormant for years and when it is detected in most of the cases, it would be too late. It is best to leave it alone if in good condition as undisturbed material does not release asbestos fibre and the inhalation does not take place. Cutting, redefining, sanding, damaging them in any kind of reshaping venture could be dangerous. Any damage or deterioration should be inspected frequently and replacement or repair or removal should be done by a professional so that fibres are not unleashed the homes and buildings. There is always another less harmful option of sealing off the material. According to Canadian institute, chrysotile is not a health effectant, and has acid-resistant properties. After inhalation, the body quickly eliminates it and unless the person is exposed to prolonged and persistent exposure pulmonary damage does not happen18. This is against the claim that asbestos is the worst industrial killer19. The fibres can enter air or water; but do not evaporate or dissolve in them20. They can remain suspended in the air for a long time and could spread to any distance in the wind or in the water and they rarely settle down, unlike the larger fibres. They do not mix or break down in the soil and stay there in their original form21. Inhaling the asbestos fibres is risking cancer of lungs, pancreas, kidneys, stomach, intestines and esophagus. Combined with smoking it can create a killer combination. It is difficult to find out if cancer has set in the early stages22. This is supposed to be one of the worst occupational hazards. Asbestos connected material is used in textile industry as well. Once again, there is a lack of data about asbestosis in textile organisations23. Strict dust control could be beneficial and under such circumstances, asbestosis has lesser occurrences, though earlier conditions would definitely result in a prolonged period of incubation resulting in health hazards at a much later date. According to 2002 No. 2675 of Health and Safety, Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002, various regulations have been laid down for prevention of health hazards at homes and working places24. This absolutely useful wonder of a material had been rightly or wrongly has been accused to be a malevolent mineral. Medical evidence has proved many times that exposure to it could directly lead to tumour asbestosis, a chronic, progressive pulmonary fibrosis in which the lungs are scarred to the point of incapacitation. Drinking water could contain asbestos particles if the pipes have asbestos materials in them. Lung and surrounding membranes are affected and it will create scar-like tissues in the lungs and in pleural membrane or lining around the lung, causing severe asbestosis, usually found among workers of shipyards, transport and building sites. Heart will be enlarged resulting in heavy cough and breathing problems eventually leading to death. Pleural plaques can happen to workers exposed to lower levels of inhalation, though these are not absolutely dangerous. But due to the pleural membrane thickening, breathing becomes very difficult. Greenpeace fought a losing battle opposing the old ships lined with asbestos material being sent to India for dismantling. They said half of the world's old ships are sent to India and workers are not fully covered against health hazards that could occur due to inhalation of asbestos material25. According to Health and Safety Executive survey, UK workers face the highest risk from insulation work, and 10% of them died of mesothelioma (considered to be caused by blue asbestos). According to the pioneer work of Professor Peto, even in the first few years of 21st century, due to long latency period, deaths would continue to occur. Asbestosis, a thickening of lung membrane, a progressive fibrotic disease would continue to occur as late as 40 years of exposure. All scientists and investigators argue that drilling, sawing, unscrupulous demolition of asbestos should never be done, as this could be dangerous to the entire environment. In most of the developed countries, it is banned and instead, man made mineral fibre like material is introduced for the same purpose. Relevant legislations in UK are The Health and Safety at Work etc Act, 1974 and The Control of Asbestos at Work Regulation, 2002 and The Health and Safety at Work, etc Act 1974. There is no doubt that it is one of the most useful minerals found in the world. It is cheap, cost effective and easily available. It is still used in developing countries, who defy the medical evidences. They argue that all people who inhale asbestos dust are not victims of lung diseases. It is a naturally occurring chain-like crystal structured mineral and its deposits were found all over the world. When the crystal fibres are broken and mix with air or water, they could be dangerous. It is usually found along with other mixable minerals. EU, with effect from 1st January 2005, has banned the use of asbestos in all its Member States. According to a report of World Health Organisation - Environmental Health Criteria 203, 'Chrisotile Asbestos, specifically stated that exposure to Chrysotile asbestos poses increased risk for asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma in a dose-dependent manner. No threshold has been identified for carcinogenic risks26. International Labour Organisation had been insisting that an international ban should be placed against use of asbestos27. Chrysotile Institute of Canada has a different point of view about the whole subject. They say there are 'numerous potentially hazardous products which we use daily and which are far more dangerous than chrysotile.' They reiterate that standards, work methods and developed technologies have been introduced for controlled and safe use of asbestos and there is no need to panic28. According to them the chrysotile industry has created a user-friendly programme and all major chrysotile-exporting mines have signed the agreement that they would never supply any other fibre other than chrysotile and they will be regulated by national health and safety regulations. There could be misdiagnosis of deaths, blaming on asbestos. All exposed are not suffering from cancer. UK has taken a zero tolerance line along with EU, banning a cheap, environmental friendly and cost effective material. The problem of lung cancer in Western Europe had been quite high, even though all of them could not be brought home to the much-battered asbestos. But there could be multiple causes for these deaths. Standards of diagnosis cannot be the same in all countries and there could be mistakes. There is every possibility of other explanations for lung cancer cases. Another argument that the Asbestos is a worthwhile material economically and Canadian Government and companies are uninterested in losing this lucrative trade. They are also accused of manipulating the facts to keep their trade alive, to make fast money at someone else's misfortune. Even though the medical evidence shows a list of awful and incurable diseases, they might have been misdiagnosed too. Much research with scientific involvement has not gone into it. Medical opinions, that too, highly controversial, could never be trusted. Unless the facts, either pro-asbestos or anti-asbestos, could be supported by scientific evidence, and are established above doubt, these two diverse opinion schools will be raging against each other. Till then they continue to accuse each other as indulging in guesswork. . BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. Asbestos and other Natural Mineral Fibres, Environmental Health Criteria 53, (Geneva: World Health Organization), 1986. 2. P. Bogovski et al, eds, Biological Effects of Asbestos, iarc Scientific Publications No. 8 (Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer), 1973. 3. Hansen, Heine H. and Rorth, Mikael, eds., Lung Cancer 1980, (Oxford: Excerpta Medica), 1980. 4. Irving J. Selikoff and Douglas H.K. Lee, Asbestos and Disease, (London: Academic Press), 1978. 5. Izzettin Baris, Asbestos and Erionite Related Chest Diseases, (Department of Chest Diseases, Ankara), 1987. 6. Lung Cancer in Western Europe, 3rd edn., (Strasbourg: Council of Europe), 1978. ONLINE SOURCES: 1. http://www.chrysotile.com/en/index.aspx 2. http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/ 3. http://www.lhc.org.uk/members/pubs/books/asbestos/asb02.htm 4. http://www.asbestos-manager.webeden.co.uk/ 5. http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/ 6. http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/ 7. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/asbestos.html 8. http://www.mesolink.org/ 9. http://www.emsl.com/index.cfmnav=Pages&ID=284 10. http://www.asbestosquoter.co.uk/ 11. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts61.html 12. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20022675.htm#3 13. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/leicestershire/4527482.stm 14. http://www.chrysotile.com/en/chrysotile/controversy/default.aspx 15. http://www.newint.org/issue344/essay.htm 16. http://www.chrysotile.com/en/sfuse/industry.aspx 17. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/leicestershire/4527482.stm 18. http://www.calonline.com/news/Nov00/12/BUS3.html 19. http://destexhe.be/amiante_campagne_interdiction_angl.htm Read More